Objective: This study was conducted to investigate the applicability of Thwaites’ diagnostic criteria in order to differentiate tuberculous from bacterial meningitis. Material and Methods: The study was done retrospectively in HIV-negative patients (n = 126) with meningitis. Of the 126 patients, 103 had bacterial meningitis and 23 patients had tuberculous meningitis. The diagnosis was confirmed microbiologically in 59 and 12 patients with bacterial and tuberculous meningitis, respectively. The prediction of tuberculous meningitis was determined by Thwaites’ diagnostic scoring using parameters such as age, history of illness, white blood cell count, total cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) white cell count and the percent of neutrophils in CSF. The diagnostic value of the model was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: The sensitivity and the specificity of Thwaites’ diagnostic scoring were 95.6% (22/23) and 70.8% (73/103), respectively. In microbiologically proven cases the sensitivity and the specificity were 91.7% (11/12), 79.7% (57/59), respectively. The area under the ROC curve value for the diagnostic scoring was 0.92. Conclusions: Thwaites’ diagnostic score was found to be helpful in differential diagnosis of tuberculous meningitis, however, the usefulness of diagnostic scoring should be validated in large series especially in patients with viral meningitis and low CSF glucose levels.

Keywords:
Thwaites’ diagnostic score, Tuberculous meningitis, Viral meningitis
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel
2005
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.